Ireland’s housing debate has often focused on one question: how do we build more homes? And for the last few years, finding a solution that’s a win-win for everyone has been one of my goals.
A recent announcement by Dublin City Council (DCC) may offer an interesting glimpse into one possible answer.
DCC has launched a procurement process seeking contractors to deliver approximately 4,000 social and affordable homes across 26 sites over the next four years. With an estimated programme value of €2.5 billion, the initiative represents one of the largest direct local authority housing programmes in recent years.
Now, while the announcement is undoubtedly important, it also raises questions about how Ireland chooses to deliver housing, and whether a greater balance between public and private delivery could benefit the country over the long term.
Dublin City Council’s Home Delivery Programme: A Different Way to Deliver Much Needed Housing?
At first glance, this announcement may appear similar to many other Government housing initiatives that I have followed closely.
However, there is an important distinction.
Rather than purchasing completed homes from developers, Dublin City Council appears to be identifying sites, securing planning permission, and inviting construction companies to tender for the work.
In other words, the council is acting as the client rather than simply the buyer. This is a completely different position from my most recent article.
The contractors would build the homes, while the public authority would oversee the programme.
This procurement model is usually common in other forms of public infrastructure across ireland. Schools, hospitals and roads are frequently delivered in this way, with Government bodies commissioning projects and private construction firms carrying out the work.
If this is indeed the approach being taken, I believe it represents an interesting evolution in how public housing can be delivered during this housing crisis.
Potential Benefits.
One potential advantage is greater public control over housing delivery.
- By identifying sites and securing planning permission before construction begins, local authorities may be able to better coordinate housing development with transport, schools, parks and other public infrastructure.
2. It could also provide greater certainty over delivery timelines, particularly where sites are already in public ownership.
3. Perhaps most importantly, this approach allows the State to increase housing supply while continuing to rely on the expertise, workforce and experience of Ireland’s private construction sector.
Kindly understand that this is not a case of public versus private housing delivery, but a stronger partnership between the two that could stabilise housing prices and create a win-win situation for everyone in the long-term.
As it stands right now, if the housing crisis continues without direct state building, I fear that housing & wealth inequality in Ireland will go back to pre-20th century levels – when the top 10% held approximately 90% of total wealth.
The Apple Tax Windfall
The Irish Exchequer is now in possession €14 billion from a longstanding Apple tax case, which has been added to the National Development Plan.
The €14bn Apple tax windfall, which was finally collected in full by the Irish Government in July 2025, is a once-off, non-recurring amount of money.
- It was money that was owed to the Irish State since 2016 by Apple Inc.
- This tax was not paid or borne by the common taxpayer; so this fund could be used as an incredible social and PR tool to help Irish politicians score much-needed political points with the Irish Public while helping them at the same time.
- The Apple Tax is not a foreign loan, so there are no state obligations or strings attached to a foreign lender.
The above reasons are precisely why I believe the Apple Tax should be allocated specifically to resolve the Irish housing emergency, rather than being stored away in the well-intentioned but non-urgent National Development Plan (NDP), where the money now sits.
Economists and financial accountants have often argued that one-off income is best used to finance one-off investments rather than recurring expenditure. Dutch Uncles.
Housing is one example of such an investment.
If used strategically, capital funding can create assets that continue providing value for decades after the money itself has been spent.
- Homes, schools, roads, water infrastructure and public transport all fall into this category.
The question therefore becomes not simply whether the money should be spent, but what lasting benefits it should leave behind.
Could This Money Accelerate the Home Building Programme?
I argue that using part of the Apple tax fund to accelerate direct housing programmes could help increase supply more quickly.
Rather than replacing existing housing budgets, a once-off capital investment might allow projects already planned by local authorities to proceed sooner, while also supporting infrastructure needed for future developments.
I also understand that funding alone cannot solve the housing crisis.
This is because Ireland continues to face labour shortages in construction, staffing issues, planning challenges and rising construction costs. These would need to be addressed first before any meaningful use of the 14bn can actually bear real long-term benefits for everyone.
A Balanced Housing Model
Perhaps the most constructive lesson from Dublin City Council’s announcement is that housing delivery does not need to be viewed as a choice between public and private sectors.
From what I understand in the original Irish Times article, the council is not proposing to establish its own construction company, nor is it stepping away from private industry.
Instead, it appears to be commissioning private firms to deliver publicly planned housing projects. This is a model that combines public leadership with private expertise.
If these particular projects are successful, they may offer useful lessons for future housing delivery across Ireland.
Now, we only have to hope that they get completed in time, or none of this will matter.
Final Thoughts
Ireland’s housing challenges remain significant, and no single policy is likely to solve them on its own.
The Dublin City Council programme demonstrates one possible approach where the public sector takes a more active role in commissioning housing while continuing to work closely with private construction firms.
Whether this becomes a larger part of Ireland’s housing strategy remains to be seen.
Dublin City Council’s €2.5 billion programme suggests that public authorities can play a more active role in commissioning homes while continuing to rely on the expertise of private construction firms.
Now, if this approach can prove successful, it raises another question that is the crux of this website. Could a once-off capital windfall such as the €14 billion Apple tax fund help accelerate similar projects across Ireland, and expand overall housing supply, while leaving behind long-term public assets?
There may not yet be a definitive answer but as Ireland continues to search for sustainable housing solutions, I strongly believe that this is a discussion that may become increasingly difficult to ignore.
